31–40 of 185 posts
> The website alleges That's an unfortunately dismissive way to refer to ProPublica. They're more accomplished than most news rooms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProPublica#Awards
Dismissive? It's factual. As in, "the prosecution alleges..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue is when the ultra-wealthy take out loans against their investment assets (and thus, those unrealized capital gains). By doing that, ultra-wealthy _are_ realizing the value of their investments without being taxed. That's how this wealth is being accessed, and that's a large component of what drives these ultra-low tax rates for the ultra-wealthy.
Loans have to be repaid at some point. That does not avoid the tax, it just delays it.
How does tax treatment on loans taken out using unrealized capital gains as collateral work? In particular, has anybody here taken loans out on unvested RSUs?
I've seen people complaining that the article is disingenuous because it conflates income taxes with capital gains taxes. My response is 'so what'. When you make above a certain income level, you don't need anymore income and can play around with reinvesting capital gains to push taxes into the future while amassing wealth. Sure, you're not realizing the income, but what you're doing, I think, is gaining power and in…
I've seen people complaining that the article is disingenuous because it conflates income taxes with capital gains taxes. My response is 'so what'. When you make above a certain income level, you don't need anymore income and can play around with reinvesting capital gains to push taxes into the future while amassing wealth. Sure, you're not realizing the income, but what you're doing, I think, is gaining power and in…
We do tax capital gains. You pay taxes when you sell. Do you mean tax unrealized capital gains? There is a reason you don’t owe taxes on a stock you haven’t sold yet. For one thing, what if you have to pay tax at one valuation, and then it goes down later.
I think it would make sense to count borrowing against equity as tax-wise equivalent to selling that same equity.
With that loophole closed, together with raising the capital gains tax, I think the tax system would be much more in line with what people expect from it.
"Don't hate the player hate the game," is what comes to my mind. I would guess it's all legal. It is still good to have transparency, which might potentially change things. I am not so sure though. After all, politicans are usually rich as well. But: All of these super-rich have probably created many, many jobs. I guess all-in-all it is a positive game for society.
If anyone understands the reasoning behind the US capping your deductible net capital loss in any tax year at $3,000 vs allowing your full capital losses to be offset I'd be interested.
It's hard to argue against sunlight being the best disinfectant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue is when the ultra-wealthy take out loans against their investment assets (and thus, those unrealized capital gains). By doing that, ultra-wealthy _are_ realizing the value of their investments without being taxed. That's how this wealth is being accessed, and that's a large component of what drives these ultra-low tax rates for the ultra-wealthy.
Then HELOC would be taxed which many middle class people rely on. Also its a loan so it need to be paid back. Will payments on private loans be deducted from income then?